Sikshak Chetna Manch And ANR v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17426 of 2017 ====================================================== 1.

Sikshak Chetna Manch At and P.S. Motihari, District- East Champaran at Motihari.

2.

Rajesh Kumar, S/o Sri Braj Nandan Prasad, Assistant Teacher, Upgraded Middle School, Dhekaha Bazar, At and P.S. Motihari Muffashil, DistrictEast Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar 2.

The Director, Primary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. 3.

The Regional Deputy Director of Education, Tirhut Division at Muzaffarpur. 4.

The District Education Officer, Motihari.

5.

The District Programme Officer, Accounts and Planning, Motihari. 6.

The District Programme Officer Establishment, Motihari. null null 7.

The Commissioner of Tirhut Division at Muzaffarpur. 8.

Saheed Parwez Ansari, Assistant Teacher, Upgraded Middle School, Laxmipur, P.O. P.S. Lakhaura, Dist ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajeev Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Prabhakar Jha -Gp27 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 25-02-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

Referring to Annexure-13, which has been placed on record by way of supplementary affidavit, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that respondents have granted promotion but till date the petitioners have not been posted. Considering the fact that the respondents have already decided to grant promotion to the petitioners vide Annexure-13,

Patna High Court CWJC No.17426 of 2017(2) dt.25-02-2020 2/2 the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to take steps for posting of the petitioners on promotion at the earliest preferably within a maximum period of 60 days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

So far as consequential benefits on promotion is concerned, the respondents are supposed to take appropriate decision having regard to the promotion order which was made in December, 2017 and the petitioners cannot be made to suffer due to the lapses of the respondents in the matter. With the aforesaid, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) spandey/- U